Since it seems that everyone is ok with git I will move the DWT2
repository to github. That leads to the next question: Would git
submodules be a good idea? I haven't use submodules myself my it sounds
good in theory. I'm thinking about having sub repository for basically
every top level directory in the current repository. One repsository for
jface, one for dwt-win, one for dwt-linux and so on. What do you think?
--
/Jacob Carlborg

Since it seems that everyone is ok with git I will move the DWT2
repository to github. That leads to the next question: Would git
submodules be a good idea? I haven't use submodules myself my it sounds
good in theory. I'm thinking about having sub repository for basically
every top level directory in the current repository. One repsository for
jface, one for dwt-win, one for dwt-linux and so on. What do you think?

If it simplifies things instead of complicating them, sure. I have no
experience with neither submodules nor the Mercurial subrepos. I hope
that hg-git supports them, but wasn't able to find a repository for testing.

Since it seems that everyone is ok with git I will move the DWT2
repository to github. That leads to the next question: Would git
submodules be a good idea? I haven't use submodules myself my it sounds
good in theory. I'm thinking about having sub repository for basically
every top level directory in the current repository. One repsository for
jface, one for dwt-win, one for dwt-linux and so on. What do you think?

My experience with submodules has been great. There is a little bit of
overhead which I'll explain below, but cloning just becomes
$ git clone url
$ git submodule init
$ git submodule update
(I of course don't know hg-git's support for this)
I'd recommend separate repositories, I guess it isn't feasible to support
all the OS specific stuff under one source base? I'd think that would be
easier than supporting D1/D2/Phobos/Tango in one source tree.
But do you really need submodules? If you want dwt you'll either pull in
dtw-win dwt-linux as a submodule of your own or just dwt-linux and jface.
Personally I think the OS's should be brought together and the library/
language separation should be their own repos (jface its own repo). In
fact if that sounds reasonable I'll volunteer to try and make it happen
(as you've done dwt-mac you might know this is a bad idea)?
Back to submodules. These create clones of a completely different repo in
a subdirectory of the project. The commit hash is stored in the parent,
not the files. You can commit/branch/push/pull/merge in your submodules
just like any other local repository. As long as your working directory
is within the submodule directory.
The .gitsubmodules config file is tracked in the repository just like any
other file. This file stores the information about the repository
locations and directories to use. The first time setup can be done from
the command line but say for example someone forks dwt-linux and jface.
Assuming we are using a Hub project (or whatever the formal name would
be). There is DWT which has submodules of jface, dwt-linux... If the user
wants to have their own for of DWT that points to their forks of jface...
they would need edit the .gitsubmodules so that the URL locations point
to their git repositories.
$ git submodule init just takes the information found in the
configuration file and moves them into .git/config So once
the .gitsubmodules is updated you'll have easy checkout.
I don't think a Hub project is needed.

Since it seems that everyone is ok with git I will move the DWT2
repository to github. That leads to the next question: Would git
submodules be a good idea? I haven't use submodules myself my it sounds
good in theory. I'm thinking about having sub repository for basically
every top level directory in the current repository. One repsository for
jface, one for dwt-win, one for dwt-linux and so on. What do you think?

My experience with submodules has been great. There is a little bit of
overhead which I'll explain below, but cloning just becomes
$ git clone url
$ git submodule init
$ git submodule update
(I of course don't know hg-git's support for this)
I'd recommend separate repositories, I guess it isn't feasible to support
all the OS specific stuff under one source base? I'd think that would be
easier than supporting D1/D2/Phobos/Tango in one source tree.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean with "one source base", because
currently all OS specific stuff are in one repository.

But do you really need submodules? If you want dwt you'll either pull in
dtw-win dwt-linux as a submodule of your own or just dwt-linux and jface.

The problem is that you also always need the "base" repository. Which
contains implementations of the some Java classes and other utility
functions used by dwt.

Personally I think the OS's should be brought together and the library/
language separation should be their own repos (jface its own repo). In
fact if that sounds reasonable I'll volunteer to try and make it happen
(as you've done dwt-mac you might know this is a bad idea)?

Currently everything is in one repository but it's in separate top level
directories. Having all the OS's merge in the same directory would be
very very bad. First, it's just too much code for that. Second it's not
how SWT is arranged and it would be very difficult to port future
versions of SWT.
That was why I thought submodules could take the best of both
approaches, that is, one repository for everything (like we have now)
versus individual repositories for each project.

Back to submodules. These create clones of a completely different repo in
a subdirectory of the project. The commit hash is stored in the parent,
not the files. You can commit/branch/push/pull/merge in your submodules
just like any other local repository. As long as your working directory
is within the submodule directory.
The .gitsubmodules config file is tracked in the repository just like any
other file. This file stores the information about the repository
locations and directories to use. The first time setup can be done from
the command line but say for example someone forks dwt-linux and jface.
Assuming we are using a Hub project (or whatever the formal name would
be). There is DWT which has submodules of jface, dwt-linux... If the user
wants to have their own for of DWT that points to their forks of jface...
they would need edit the .gitsubmodules so that the URL locations point
to their git repositories.
$ git submodule init just takes the information found in the
configuration file and moves them into .git/config So once
the .gitsubmodules is updated you'll have easy checkout.
I don't think a Hub project is needed.

I think I need to read more about submodules. What I was hoping for was
that you could have individual repositories for each project and then a
super project. When the super project could contain the build script and
when it's cloned the sub respiratory will be cloned as well.
--
/Jacob Carlborg

I'm not exactly sure what you mean with "one source base", because
currently all OS specific stuff are in one repository.

But do you really need submodules? If you want dwt you'll either pull
in dtw-win dwt-linux as a submodule of your own or just dwt-linux and
jface.

The problem is that you also always need the "base" repository. Which
contains implementations of the some Java classes and other utility
functions used by dwt.

Oh, that makes sense then yeah submodules is not a bad approach.

Personally I think the OS's should be brought together and the library/
language separation should be their own repos (jface its own repo). In
fact if that sounds reasonable I'll volunteer to try and make it happen
(as you've done dwt-mac you might know this is a bad idea)?

Currently everything is in one repository but it's in separate top level
directories. Having all the OS's merge in the same directory would be
very very bad. First, it's just too much code for that. Second it's not
how SWT is arranged and it would be very difficult to port future
versions of SWT.
That was why I thought submodules could take the best of both
approaches, that is, one repository for everything (like we have now)
versus individual repositories for each project.
I think I need to read more about submodules. What I was hoping for was
that you could have individual repositories for each project and then a
super project. When the super project could contain the build script and
when it's cloned the sub respiratory will be cloned as well.

It is almost like that. It's just that the cloning also requires the
initialization and cloning of the submodules. You'll have to keep them in
sync and I've never submoduled a project that had submodules it self.
I'm not user if there is much point in separating them if you can use dwt-
linux or win in something else. But jface could be its own repository as
that isn't required to used DWT at all. And making that a submodule is
fine.

It is almost like that. It's just that the cloning also requires the
initialization and cloning of the submodules. You'll have to keep them in
sync and I've never submoduled a project that had submodules it self.

Yeah, I've read that now.

I'm not user if there is much point in separating them if you can use dwt-
linux or win in something else. But jface could be its own repository as
that isn't required to used DWT at all. And making that a submodule is
fine.

Not all top level directories need to be submodules, that was just a
thought. I could include everything to make it possible to build DWT in
one repository (the super repository) and have everything else in
submodules.
--
/Jacob Carlborg

Not all top level directories need to be submodules, that was just a
thought. I could include everything to make it possible to build DWT in
one repository (the super repository) and have everything else in
submodules.

Looking a little closer at the stuff, I've remembered part of DWT is a
port of Java, and looks like part of Eclipse.
My thought would be that those are separate porting efforts, and you'd
have dwt (which includes the the Windows and Linux code together, ie the
swt source) which has the Java/Eclipse ports as submodules.
Though it seems that DWT isn't laid out the same as SWT 3.8's repo:
http://git.eclipse.org/c/platform/eclipse.platform.swt.git/tree/
Anyway, I hope I'm contributing to you making a decision rather than just
adding confusion.

Not all top level directories need to be submodules, that was just a
thought. I could include everything to make it possible to build DWT in
one repository (the super repository) and have everything else in
submodules.

Looking a little closer at the stuff, I've remembered part of DWT is a
port of Java, and looks like part of Eclipse.

DWT is a port of SWT which is Java and part of Eclipse. To ease the
porting some parts of Java is ported as well.

My thought would be that those are separate porting efforts, and you'd
have dwt (which includes the the Windows and Linux code together, ie the
swt source) which has the Java/Eclipse ports as submodules.

It is almost like that. It's just that the cloning also requires the
initialization and cloning of the submodules. You'll have to keep them in
sync and I've never submoduled a project that had submodules it self.

Yeah, I've read that now.

I'm not user if there is much point in separating them if you can use dwt-
linux or win in something else. But jface could be its own repository as
that isn't required to used DWT at all. And making that a submodule is
fine.

Not all top level directories need to be submodules, that was just a
thought. I could include everything to make it possible to build DWT in
one repository (the super repository) and have everything else in
submodules.

What problem is splitting things into submodules supposed to solve? The
current Mercurial repository with everything in it is just 50 MB. I
suppose Git repositories take up more space, but assume that's not why
you want to split things up?
If submodules are meant for the same use cases as SVN externals, they
are primarily for automatically pulling in stuff that is separate
because it is actually a separate project, probably maintained by
someone else, or maybe just hosted elsewhere for some reason. Not for
splitting a project into parts. Which is why I'm wondering what exactly
you want to achieve here.

If submodules are meant for the same use cases as SVN externals, they
are primarily for automatically pulling in stuff that is separate
because it is actually a separate project, probably maintained by
someone else, or maybe just hosted elsewhere for some reason. Not for
splitting a project into parts. Which is why I'm wondering what exactly
you want to achieve here.

With SVN you will create large projects/multi-projects in one repository,
this can include multiple tools, libraries, and everything else. SVN also
provides the ability to checkout subdirectories without pulling
everything else.
My suggest for submoduling is to separate parts that could be reused by
something not DWT. For example the base directory that contains base Java
components. The parts of Eclipse that aren't part of SWT (as it is
handled by the SWT repository). These can be used by others that are
porting something from Java/Eclipse that isn't DWT. (not likely but still
different).

It is almost like that. It's just that the cloning also requires the
initialization and cloning of the submodules. You'll have to keep
them in
sync and I've never submoduled a project that had submodules it self.

Yeah, I've read that now.

I'm not user if there is much point in separating them if you can use
dwt-
linux or win in something else. But jface could be its own repository as
that isn't required to used DWT at all. And making that a submodule is
fine.

Not all top level directories need to be submodules, that was just a
thought. I could include everything to make it possible to build DWT in
one repository (the super repository) and have everything else in
submodules.

What problem is splitting things into submodules supposed to solve? The
current Mercurial repository with everything in it is just 50 MB. I
suppose Git repositories take up more space, but assume that's not why
you want to split things up?
If submodules are meant for the same use cases as SVN externals, they
are primarily for automatically pulling in stuff that is separate
because it is actually a separate project, probably maintained by
someone else, or maybe just hosted elsewhere for some reason. Not for
splitting a project into parts. Which is why I'm wondering what exactly
you want to achieve here.

In addition to what Jesse Phillips replied to your post I think that
these projects actually should be separate repositories. Another reason
is that currently I have only interest in DWT and JFace. I see no reason
to have the other projects in the same repository.
--
/Jacob Carlborg

It is almost like that. It's just that the cloning also requires the
initialization and cloning of the submodules. You'll have to keep
them in
sync and I've never submoduled a project that had submodules it self.

Yeah, I've read that now.

I'm not user if there is much point in separating them if you can use
dwt-
linux or win in something else. But jface could be its own repository as
that isn't required to used DWT at all. And making that a submodule is
fine.

Not all top level directories need to be submodules, that was just a
thought. I could include everything to make it possible to build DWT in
one repository (the super repository) and have everything else in
submodules.

What problem is splitting things into submodules supposed to solve? The
current Mercurial repository with everything in it is just 50 MB. I
suppose Git repositories take up more space, but assume that's not why
you want to split things up?
If submodules are meant for the same use cases as SVN externals, they
are primarily for automatically pulling in stuff that is separate
because it is actually a separate project, probably maintained by
someone else, or maybe just hosted elsewhere for some reason. Not for
splitting a project into parts. Which is why I'm wondering what exactly
you want to achieve here.

In addition to what Jesse Phillips replied to your post I think that
these projects actually should be separate repositories. Another reason
is that currently I have only interest in DWT and JFace. I see no reason
to have the other projects in the same repository.

Okay, I think I get the picture now. Sounds like a good plan, then.
Would DWT become a single repository with all platform implementations
and snippets in it, that has the base Java library as a submodule? Or
would it be dwt-win, dwt-linux, dwt-snippets, etc.? The former sounds
simpler, but the latter could make it possible to get rid of the extra
directory levels that DWT2 uses currently.

Okay, I think I get the picture now. Sounds like a good plan, then.
Would DWT become a single repository with all platform implementations
and snippets in it, that has the base Java library as a submodule? Or
would it be dwt-win, dwt-linux, dwt-snippets, etc.? The former sounds
simpler, but the latter could make it possible to get rid of the extra
directory levels that DWT2 uses currently.

Okay, I think I get the picture now. Sounds like a good plan, then.
Would DWT become a single repository with all platform implementations
and snippets in it, that has the base Java library as a submodule? Or
would it be dwt-win, dwt-linux, dwt-snippets, etc.? The former sounds
simpler, but the latter could make it possible to get rid of the extra
directory levels that DWT2 uses currently.

This does look right. Though I'll bring up this thought which also goes
against my proposal. Not that I'm against the idea.
Suppose you have a project which uses DWT, then later I want to make use
of JFace. Since JFace comes with DWT you'd rework your build to include
the new location rather than just add JFace too it. However as you don't
have to pull in JFaces DWT you can just leave it. But what about the
other direction, you start by using JFace and decide to phase it out,
either to use DWT itself or another layer library.
Anyway these are uncommon, already require proper redesign and yadda so I
like your reasoning.

Okay, I think I get the picture now. Sounds like a good plan, then.
Would DWT become a single repository with all platform implementations
and snippets in it, that has the base Java library as a submodule? Or
would it be dwt-win, dwt-linux, dwt-snippets, etc.? The former sounds
simpler, but the latter could make it possible to get rid of the extra
directory levels that DWT2 uses currently.

I haven't decided this yet and it's this I'm trying to figure out, what
will be the best. This is also why I'm asking here what people think.
I'm not sure what you mean with "extra directory levels that DWT2 uses
currently". Do you mean that org.eclipse.swt.gtk.linux.x86 contains:
src
org
eclipse
swt
...
This will most likely not change. When all platforms were in their own
repositories (DWT1) we just had "dwt" as the root directory. The current
package layout, in DWT2, is what the original SWT sources use and it was
decided that it was best to follow the original sources as closely as
possible to ease porting future versions of SWT.
In DWT1 most classes containing "SWT" was renamed to "DWT" but this just
caused more problems. I guess it would be easier to rename the root
package to DWT then renaming all classes containing "SWT". But it would
be an additional step when porting future versions. I do agree that this
deep package level is annoying.
--
/Jacob Carlborg